Any advantages to using a MOTU interface with DP8?

[deckard1]

But, the RME Babyface is a bit out of my price range.

See B&H. Babyface 649. Duet 599. Big difference in function.

I had no idea...thanks for the reference.

I am using a Presonus AudioBox at the moment for my audio interface. How much of a difference is there going to be sonically between the AudioBox and the Babyface? I read somewhere the differences in the quality of the sound output between audio interfaces are negligible. It's the inputs (e.g. preamps) that separates the audio interfaces. Also, I am not really interested in the sophisticated software the Babyface comes with...just the sound output.

Thanks.

[bayswater]

RME has a reputation for good sound, but I don't have one and can't say. It may be that converters don't make a lot of difference, but there is still the analog in and out pieces that might differ.

[Shooshie]

RME has a reputation for good sound, but I don't have one and can't say. It may be that converters don't make a lot of difference, but there is still the analog in and out pieces that might differ.

Converters make a lot of difference. Jitter is a problem in cheaper converters. When you actually hear a difference between two units, it's probably because of the clock or converters.

[bayswater]

Converters make a lot of difference. Jitter is a problem in cheaper converters. When you actually hear a difference between two units, it's probably because of the clock or converters.

No doubt about that when it comes to very cheap versus very expensive converters. But for the sort of converters a lot of us might be considering, like those in the price range under consideration, is it that much of a factor? Are there any in that range that are really good, or really bad compared to the rest?

[monkey man]

Isn't there a hardware play through capability with the MOTU gear?

NOT with the AVB line. You have to direct patch input to output or use the AVB app mixer. Chaps my ass.

It's killin' me and I don't / can't even own 'em with my current Mac.

Sorry Doug, I know it's old news but the AVB saga's still eating away at me.

[deckard1]

What specs do you look for to measure conversion within an audio interface? Is it this number: 24-bit/192kHz?

Thanks.

[bayswater]

That just tells you the bit rate and sampling frequency. After that there is signal to noise ratio, and other analog specs to look at that, the number of analog inputs and outputs, the number and types of digital inputs and outputs, etc. A good place to look at these is the Sweetwater site (click on the Ad at the top of this page). They lay out the specs in a standard format for each interface, and have a glossary to define them.

What matters a lot more is whether you like the way it sounds.

[deckard1]

That just tells you the bit rate and sampling frequency. After that there is signal to noise ratio, and other analog specs to look at that, the number of analog inputs and outputs, the number and types of digital inputs and outputs, etc. A good place to look at these is the Sweetwater site (click on the Ad at the top of this page). They lay out the specs in a standard format for each interface, and have a glossary to define them.

What matters a lot more is whether you like the way it sounds.

Thanks for the excellent info! If what matters the most is the quality of the sound, then I am going to go with the Apogee Duet. It adds a certain high-end sheen to the sound that I like a lot. I've heard the Babyface and it is a lot more neutral-sounding.

[bayswater]

Thanks for the excellent info! If what matters the most is the quality of the sound, then I am going to go with the Apogee Duet. It adds a certain high-end sheen to the sound that I like a lot. I've heard the Babyface and it is a lot more neutral-sounding.

I've heard the same about these two units. I'd be inclined to get the babyface. It has a lot more in the way of flexible inputs. And I'd rather have the neutral sound and add the sheen when I want it. I almost ordered a babyface but there was a kerfuffle about drivers with a OS X update. Then NAMM happened and a load of new units came out. The new Arturia looks interesting.

[BKK-OZ]

Not sure at all if the RME stuff was the cause of Stubbsonic's problems, but he did mention (potential?) RME driver issues here: http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... stubbsonic

[Shooshie]

When it comes to drivers, nobody has been more reliable than MOTU, at least that I know of. And why would anyone want an interface that added EQ without being told to? "Sheen" is EQ and compression, or some other FX, and I want all that under my control, using the plugins that I choose for it. The last thing I want is for an interface to add its own color after I'm done.

Shooshie

[sampolfonz]

I used a Motu hd192 system for years in my home. At church (used weekly) I have an 828 m3 with 2 8 pre units to expand inputs. Solid as a rock. The monitoring is great through the CueMix software in both setups. The hd192 was PCI based, the 828, Firewire based.

In September of last year I bought a new mac so I needed to sell a lot of my gear to make up some cash and get an interface that worked with my new "thunderbolt-only" equipped Mac Pro. After research, and heavy comparing I decided to stray away from the new Motu AVB line and get a UAD Apollo Quad.

I love it !!! It has the direct monitor capability and a great feature is I can select anything from my UAD plug in library and insert it on the UAD Console and choose to record with effects on the inputs. This is great, as I love to use a little bit of the Teltronix LA2 Grey unit on all of the inputs. Just a shade, nothing over the top. I also like the 610b preamp plugin on acoustic guitar.

It is a bit pricey, but it sounds very good. A downside to the UAD units is the bounce time. If you bounce instead of run the mix in real time, the bounce will be greatly slowed down, at least it was for me compared to my former hd192 and UAD-2 PCI setups. However, the sound quality is great, UAD plugins on te inputs is a huge plus and of course, direct monitoring.

I didn't know that the new AVB series would not allow direct hardware monitoring. It would bother me greatly too; now I'm glad I made the choice I did. Straightforward and simple.

I'm sure there are a lot of great interfaces in the 2 and four channel range now. Buy it, be careful with your packing materials and return the one you don't like.

Enjoy.

Sam

[deckard1]

When it comes to drivers, nobody has been more reliable than MOTU, at least that I know of. And why would anyone want an interface that added EQ without being told to? "Sheen" is EQ and compression, or some other FX, and I want all that under my control, using the plugins that I choose for it. The last thing I want is for an interface to add its own color after I'm done.

Shooshie

I've never owned a MOTU interface so can't comment on their interfaces, but, from what I have read and heard over the years from professionals in the music business...RME is supposed to have the most reliable drivers. I can also speak from personal experience as I used to own a Babyface. The thing was solid as a rock. I just had to update the drivers now and again. Perhaps MOTU is on par with RME. I honestly don't know.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

I've owned M-Audio (yeeeeech! - the WORST!) and Focusrite (not too bad) but by far MOTU stuff has been top notch and reliable. The Track 16 is awesome and runs amazingly well under 10.10.2. Much cooler on the 2013 Mac Pro trash can than on my 8 core MP (2008).

[Babz]

Guess I should have been paying closer attention to the whole AVB thing. So basically CueMix is deadend technology now, then?

Babz